🔗 Share this article

Only two days before the New York race for mayor, political analyst Michael Lange issued a bold forecast – going beyond the winner overall, but precinct by precinct. The analyst, an expert in elections born and raised in New York City, devoted over a decade in progressive politics and has become a kind of well-known figure recently for his thorough analyses into municipal statistics and voter surveys.

He published his extremely precise prediction map – accurately predicting that the progressive candidate was victorious although failed to predict Andrew Cuomo’s strong performance – on his Substack, his platform. He has a flair for witty coinages. He highlighted, for instance, the split between the progressive stronghold, stretching from Park Slope to Bushwick to a third locale, where he forecasted (correctly) that Mamdani would triumph by large leads, and the conservative-leaning zone on affluent parts of Manhattan. There, “the Free Press and Wall Street Journal surpass the mainstream paper” in readership and most voters leaned toward the independent, who ran as a moderate alternative.

Election Night Trends and Surprises

How was your night?

It was necessary since they were adding around 200,000 ballots into the system every few minutes! I was actually somewhat anxious initially: Mamdani was ahead the initial ballots by 12 points, but came two big batches of ballots that came in later and the advantage went from 12% to 8%. It was concerning.

Understand, it was possible where yesterday turned out kind of poorly for him, where Cuomo was going to end up essentially increasing his support from the earlier contest. But the winner added half a million votes to his primary coalition, and that’s a huge reason why he succeeded. He went out and massively expanded his support from the first round.

Expanding Support

Where did the mayor-elect gain additional support from?

He built the alliance that progressives long aimed for: it’s multiracial, it’s young, it’s renters and individuals squeezed by affordability. He improved considerably with minority communities, working- and middle-class voters, compared to the earlier election. Plus he further maximized his base of left-leaning activists, young leftists, and Muslims and south Asians. He couldn’t have won without expanding his appeal.

He created the alliance that the left always wanted to build: diverse, youthful, renters and residents struggling with costs

Additionally, there were some supporters of both candidates – is this significant?

It is a genuine phenomenon, confined to Hispanic laborers, Asian communities and Islamic voters. Electors in immigrant strongholds that supported the former president previously went for Zohran now. However I wouldn’t say he was winning over white working-class voters and Trump loyalists.

Turnout and Impact

A major development of the election was the record turnout. Who did that help?

Each candidate. Participation was significantly higher than anticipated. I figured it could exceed 2 million, but it’s closer to 2.3M – which is a huge number of participants. Existed a substantial opposition group, energized, but the Mamdani base was equally driven, and that sufficed to secure victory.

You predicted he’d exceed 50% of the vote. Is he on course for that?

Right now you would say he’s likely to get over half. He has just over 50% but there’s still around 200K ballots uncounted as of Wednesday morning. So I don’t think certain, but I think it’s likely, and I wish he does so afterwards none can claim Sliwa was a spoiler.

GOP Decline

The GOP candidate, the Republican candidate, is the other big story. His vote completely collapsed.

He lost any district in any borough. Not even Tottenville in Staten Island, similar to an highly conservative neighborhood. That really surprised me. Cuomo held Caucasian districts, very wealthy areas and very religiously Jewish areas, and plus gained many conservatives on the island who had a strong turnout. I believe occurred significant tactical voting by GOP voters. This happened before Trump tweeted his support for the candidate, but it assisted. It could have even turned the tide if Mamdani’s coalition hadn’t grown.

The “Commie Corridor”

What about your much mentioned “commie corridor” – did backing for the candidate dominant in those parts of Brooklyn and Queens?

In my view existed a little dilution of the commie corridor in some areas like neighborhoods that have older Caucasian residents. There, for example, the Greek landlords and homeowners supported the independent. So there was some opposition. However overall, largely the leftist base is a key factor why Mamdani prevailed – he scored between 77% and 83% in Fort Greene, Clinton Hill and Bushwick.

Jewish Voters

Prior to the election there was coverage on if Mamdani was making inroads with the community. Any indication that he succeeded?

There are areas with many non-religious and left-inclined voters – like Park Slope and Morningside Heights – where he performed strongly. However in the affluent districts such as the Upper East Side, his Middle East stance was influential there. Similarly in the more middle-class Jewish areas including Forest Hills, Rego Park, or Bronx areas – they all leaned the independent. And also, you have Jewish immigrants from the former Soviet Union in southern Brooklyn, who were pretty staunchly supportive. Therefore it’s unclear if there were major surprises on this one, but he retained left-leaning areas and even parts of the Upper West Side by big margins.

Political Impact

Did Mamdani redefine what the city represents in politics? Will progressive base serve as a springboard for progressive contenders?

Yes, it’s not accidental that some of the biggest figures from the left come from a few areas in the boroughs. I believe that there will be more of that – candidates will come from these neighborhoods to be promoted to higher office.

However I believe that each urban center in the US can have their own commie corridor. Urban places are the epicenters of progressive influence in America – since they’re young, people rent and they represent locales where people are crushed by the disparities we face.